I think there might be some missing detail in the article. It could be that the definition of 'others' might be broad, and that the only value requirement is th

I think there might be some missing detail in the article. It could be that the definition of 'others' might be broad, and that the only value requirement is that your expected value would be changed (lowered) if anyone but you invest or work in/with the enterprise. As such others would refer to both investors and workers/participants in the enterprise. There are parallels to this thinking in other (non US) legislation, which quite likely come from the same source. And both Apple and ETH would certainly lose value if I were both the only investor, and active participant in the enterprise.